PDA

View Full Version : Understanding TAX cuts..............


mark
November 8th, 2004, 11:51 PM
............I read this this evening & thought--Right on-- so I thought I would post it here for everyone to comment on.

So, here goes:

"Understanding Tax Cuts"

Sometimes politicians, journalists and the liberal left exclaim: "It's
just a tax cut for the rich!" and it is just accepted to be fact.

But what does that really mean?

Just in case you are not completely clear on this issue, I hope the
following will help. Please read it carefully.

Let's put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand.

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for dinner and the bill for all
ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it
would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men ate dinner in the restaurant every day and seemed quite
happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a
curve.

"Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce
the cost of your daily meal by $20." Dinner for the ten now cost just
$80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so
the first four men were unaffected. They would still eat for free. But
what about the other six men--the paying customers? How could they
divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his "fair share?"

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted
that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would
each end up being paid to eat their meal.

So, the restaurant owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each
man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the
amounts each should pay.

And so:

The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% savings).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four
continued to eat for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men
began to compare their savings.

"I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man. He
pointed to the tenth man, "But he got $10!"

"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar,
too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than me!"

"That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back
when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get
anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for dinner, so the nine sat
down and ate without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they
discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between
all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how
our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most
benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being
wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might
start eating overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D
Professor of Economics
University of Georgia


Makes a lot of sense to me, but liberals just don't get it.

What do you all think?? ...............see ya Mark

acoolmom777
November 9th, 2004, 09:32 AM
I must say, that is so well done...I am going to use this in my daughters math this morning...I'll let you know how she does...

Thanks Mark..:)

tkcomer
November 9th, 2004, 10:39 AM
That’s a nice little analogy but it doesn’t deal in reality. Even under a flat tax, the ones that make more will pay more. One problem is the tax code is too complicated. I get very little back because I have few deductions. The well to do can hire a tax lawyer that makes more than me to get back more than I’ll make. Lets just revamp the personal income tax code to get rid of all deductions. Remember, deductions are a tax break to someone. And I don’t see the rich fleeing the country. They may send our jobs over there, but the headquarters still stay here.

acoolmom777
November 9th, 2004, 10:49 AM
Wait a minute...I have to have my deductions...I am self employed...If I didn't have my deductions, I would be ate alive in my "self employment" tax. :eek:

tkcomer
November 9th, 2004, 11:50 AM
Self-employed is running a business. That would be different.

acoolmom777
November 9th, 2004, 01:34 PM
Not if you are incorporated..as I am. I incorporated 7 yrs ago to help with my taxes and it did alittle back then...but now I have a CPA and Tax Lawyer on my payroll. The paperwork is out of this world...grrrrrrr.

And Mark...I gave this to my daughter to figure out (wrote it out as a math problem)...she got it right off the bat...lol...oh and she will be 10 next month.:cool:

Jeremy
November 9th, 2004, 02:19 PM
The problem isn't the math, it's magic. Magic tricks are all about misdirection, which is what the whole tax cut story was all about. "If The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction" then any discussion of a tax cut should only be directed at those select few. The misdirection is that it was made an issue during the election when it only effects a small portion of the population. Everyone I know thought they were getting a tax break no matter how much money they made. That's not an accident.

Chuck
November 9th, 2004, 06:51 PM
Personally I see the light...

Being self employeed and looking at the math I love it.

Not fair to the working man but why would I care about them anyway.

I say vote it in for me. Lets do value added taxing thing. I could use the tax break. Let the poor working man carry the burdon of paying my way.

After all what do I owe the working man anyway? He was just a customer once or twice. And isn't increasing my profit margin amd making him pay my tax what America is all about?

Now back to reality...
Lets face it we all hate taxes. But someone has to pay them so why not everyone?

The whole idea of taxing people that are on welfare and SS is to say the least STUPID. We would end up increasing the amount of money they get to compensate for the lost monies from taxes they have to pay with money we give them.

Why else would a person like me that would stand to gain more from this be against it? Because it is unfair taxing.

Jeremy
November 9th, 2004, 08:15 PM
Since we're talking about taxation and how businesses play into it, I think it's fair to bring up that businesses aren't really fair when it comes to pricing for their goods and services, so why should tax burden be more fair when it comes to them?

Discriminatory pricing is involved in every business from car sales on up. The car salesperson evaluates how much a customer is worth as they are walking through the door. A young person is seen as an easy sale. An older person is seen as a harder sale. The price is changed accordingly. A credit check is run and the financer evaluates how much the loan is worth based on the customer's history of paying back loans. The loan costs more to someone with a lower credit score than a higher one. Then we have markets. I went to Cincinnati to buy my car rather than paying a higher price (several hundreds of dollars higher) for the exact same car here in Maysville. It cost me $10 in gas to drive to Cincinnati, but I saved over a grand. That's just cars. Health care is even worse. Insurance companies charge more based on per pound weight of the insured. Doctors add certain tests to the bill based on how gullible their patient is.

Very few businesses have a flat rate charge and most large businesses wouldn't dream of it. Everyone evaluates the price of goods and services and then tacks on a profit margin largely based on the customer's ability to pay that price.

One of the most absurd things I heard is that health care prices are going up because of "frivilous lawsuits". No, health care prices will always go up. Costs of anything will always go up. What changes is the excuse for it. Let's just call it inflation. At least that makes sense.

Here's what will happen if you get rid of personal taxes altogether and just tax businesses: Businesses will look at customers and determine that they have more money. They will, in turn, increase the costs of goods and services and relieve customers of that extra money. The government will take their share.

Here's what will happen if you tax people and relieve the business tax burden: People will have less money to buy goods and services. Businesses will increase the cost of goods and services to make up the loss. The government will take their share.

The cost of running a government will be paid for no matter who get's the bill. And we always get the bill. The only thing we can hope for is that the government keeps costs low so that the bill isn't so much. But that kind of hope is more akin to denial.


-- Added later

I forgot to add that airlines are now saying that fat people are causing the costs of plane tickets to go up. They say that fat people flying means that there is more stress on the plane and it takes more fuel to get where they're going. C'mon. They pay for their tickets too. In some cases really fat people have to buy two tickets. Just another example of businesses trying to blame price hikes on something other than their own need to make money. Isn't it the real truth that airline tickets are more expensive because people were afraid to fly after 9/11? Why not just admit that rather than blame it on fat people. It's like the frivilous law suits and health care topic. We pay thousands of dollars a year in insurance and in most cases they pay out very little. They are, after all, a for profit business. They don't even insure people at all if they think it will cost too much to insure them. So, if lawyers are forcing them to pay aren't they really just paying what they're supposed to pay anyway?

mark
November 9th, 2004, 11:27 PM
.......................Donna, I'm glad your daughter figured it out. Sounds like you have a sharp young girl there. Regarding the rich getting tax breaks, it seems some here has forgotten Clinton's famous "luxury" tax he imposed while Prez.

If you remember, the rich simply bought their boats from out of the country to avoid this silly luxury tax.

Guess what......the rich still won--they bought their boats without being taxed.........and the boat industry workers mostly in the NE went down to the toilet because the rich bought them elsewhere. Duh?? it seems the common man working in the boat industry was laid off.

It don't take a rocket scientist to figure this one out.

Make the rich mad, they do go elsewhere................see ya Mark

tkcomer
November 10th, 2004, 01:48 PM
Ahhh, the luxury tax. That just stopped on cars last year. That just proves my point again. Give the rich a loophole and they will use it. It amazes me how a person will go to extremes to get out of paying a tax on a 1 million dollar boat, but will throw hundreds out of work to increase their pay. And why would the government care about the boat builders? They don’t seem to care about the thousands of other jobs that left this country. Jobs that could be pouring tax money in to government coffers and then maybe they could reduce the tax rates and stay solvent. Lets face it. Only about 7 or 8 hundred people run this country and the rest of us are not on their priority list. Only the government can keep them straight. And the government is not doing a very good a job.

Jeremy
November 10th, 2004, 06:24 PM
Some of those 7 or 8 hundred people are in the government as well. Look at Haliburton.

- Added later:

Actually all of them are, through lobyists and friends.

tkcomer
November 11th, 2004, 01:51 PM
All the more reason to vote the bums out. We'll never get a handle on taxes and spending until we do.

mark
November 11th, 2004, 11:03 PM
...............If I remember right, the "luxury tax" was repealed after the boat workers were put out of work. The gov't doesn't get it very well, when you tax the luxuries, it won't hurt the rich, it only hurts the little man. The blue collar workers were the ones out of work.

You won't hurt the rich, even Ted Kennedy knows that................see ya Mark